Trade
in sentence
11085 examples of Trade in a sentence
What’s more, the US should start doing what rich countries are supposed to do: exporting capital and running a
trade
surplus to fund industrialization in underdeveloped parts of the world.
World Bank chief economist, Joseph Stiglitz has called on China to pursue a beggar-thy-neighbor strategy, never mind that China is a
trade
surplus country, has large reserves, little debt, and grows at more than 7%.
An already far too high dollar would be pushed even higher as Asia seeks to resolve its employment problems by ever-larger
trade
surpluses.
A vast number of people can be employed if only the government stops protecting State enterprises by restrictions on production and internal
trade.
China is far more interested in focusing on the United States, its major
trade
partner and rival, and on South Asia and Iran, which supplies much of China’s oil and regards it as a more reliable ally than Russia.
These institutions, based on free trade, competition, limited budget deficits, and sound money, are fundamentally pro-market; there is little leeway within them for doctrinaire Socialism.
Moreover, innovative financing techniques – such as structured
trade
finance, warehouse receipt finance, and supplier finance – are already in place or being developed.
Other options that the economists favored spending some of their $50 billion include providing micro-nutrients to the world’s hungry, establishing free trade, and battling malaria with mosquito nets and medication.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration’s rejection of trans-oceanic
trade
and investment pacts has confused its friends and emboldened its rivals.
It is reasonable to presume that the commodity boom’s positive effect on Latin America’s terms of
trade
will last for an extended period – perhaps 10-15 years – but that it will not be permanent.
Economists believe that policies that increase national income, such as free
trade
and deregulation, are always socially beneficial, regardless of how these higher incomes are distributed.
What if market-fundamentalist politics specifically prohibits the income redistribution or regional, industrial, and education subsidies that could compensate those who suffer from free
trade
and labor-market “flexibility”?
Instead, policies that intensify competition, whether in trade, labor markets, or domestic production, may be socially destructive and politically explosive.
But if market fundamentalism blocks expansionary macroeconomic policies and prevents redistributive taxation or public spending, populist resistance to trade, labor-market deregulation, and pension reform is bound to intensify.
Suppose, on the other hand, that the “progressive” economics of full employment and redistribution could be combined with the “conservative” economics of free
trade
and labor-market liberalization.
On the one hand, world
trade
is growing, and so are Latin America’s exports.
On the other hand, the terms of
trade
have improved.
Structural deflationary pressures in the developed countries – such as highly debated increments of productivity in the United States – help the central banks to maintain price stability, which means that growing exports and high terms of
trade
have been accompanied by reasonably low interest rates.
Even during that 1997 crisis, this lesson was already being recognized, for the members of the Asia-Pacific Economic Community (APEC) remained committed to
trade
liberalization, one of the key forces that helped restart growth in Asia’s economies.
Looking back at Asia’s economic growth over the past 12 years, it is clear that liberalization of
trade
and investment paid off.
Migrant remittances exceed the value of all overseas development aid combined, to say nothing of the taxes that migrants pay, the investments they make, and the
trade
they stimulate.
Advocates of
trade
liberalization touted its advantages; but they were never fully honest about its risks, against which markets typically fail to provide adequate insurance.
Over a quarter-century ago, I showed that, under plausible conditions,
trade
liberalization could make everyone worse off.
Given Britain’s chronic
trade
and current-account deficits, an exit from the euro would have necessarily caused a decline in the international value of UK bank deposits.
Had London found itself in the clasp of the European Central Bank’s policies in the 2008-2012 period, Britain’s large
trade
and budget deficits, in conjunction with massive bailouts for the City, would have made the Greek, Irish, Portuguese, and Spanish bailouts look like child’s play.
In fact, disconnected from the heroin trade, which has turned the Taliban into a colossal economic concern, Al Qaeda is in clear financial decline.
While Germany has a hefty
trade
surplus with the United Kingdom, the integrity of the EU’s single market matters more to Merkel and German business than cutting a sweetheart deal with the UK.
These so-called "wars" are part of the same conflict that prompted the peasant blockades of September 2000, the continuing protests by coca growers against efforts to eradicate their crops because of their role in the cocaine trade, and the withdrawal earlier this year of a progressive tax project.
Brazil’s openness, by contrast, is limited by the strictures of Mercosur, a regional grouping whose commitment to growth through
trade
is shaky at best.
What is novel is our understanding of how long these differences in
trade
policies can take to yield appreciable gaps in economic performance.
Back
Next
Related words
Global
Countries
Would
Which
Economic
World
Their
Investment
International
Other
Growth
Could
Deficit
Policy
Should
Economy
About
Country
Between
While